...
| Number | Current Text | Proposed Text / Query / Suggestion | Proposer | +1 (add your name here if you agree with the proposal) | Action (please leave this column blank) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rebrand R&S | "Rebrand InCommon's R&S efforts" to avoid giving the impression to the rest of the eduGAIN community that the recommendation is to change the name of the entity categroy. | Scott Koranda | +1 please don't open that rathole again! | |
| 2 | "less secure alternatives to federation" | Page 5. "less secure and more privacy-invasive alternatives". It's ironic that SPs and IdPs that create incentives to use them "because privacy" are actually driving users to share more personal data! | Andrew Cormack | ||
| 3 | "practical examples" | Page 7. You may cover this later, and it may not apply to InCommon members but I suspect a lot of IdPs would be greatly helped by providing detailed instructions on how to configure their software to support R&S... | Andrew Cormack | ||
| 4 | "bigger tent" | Page 10-11. Can you use the existing R&S SPs as a channel, to explain to researchers how they could make their, and their institutions', lives easier? We've been trying to close the loop between researchers' needs and central IT provision for a long time  | Andrew Cormack | ||
| 5 | "4.3.3 Make R&S attribute release the default policy for InCommon" | I'm confused about "default" versus "requirement" in this section. If the proposal is to make R&S support a requirement to Baseline Expectations, so all InCommon IdPs are required to support R&S, I think it could be stated more directly, and in my opinion, it should be the #1 recommendation, not the last one, since it's a big ask and buried on page 14 it's easy to miss. | Jim Basney | ||
See Also